Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Events in the Middle East today have repercussions on the streets of Britain and Europe.

Jews are attacked here in Britain, they are blockaded into a synagogue in Paris and the chant ‘Death to the Jews’ is heard in Germany for the first time in 70 years.

But too few people seem to want to notice this or admit what it means. They think this is just about Israel, or just about Jewish people. It isn’t. It is about all of us.

The decision last month by the Israeli government to respond to Hamas rocket-fire from Gaza is the response any government would choose if rockets were fired at its citizens. The Israeli government has the right - as does any government - to stop the bombarding of its people.

However, in recent weeks it has become plain that much of the world expects a different response from Israel. They expect Israel not to fight for the safety, security and survival of their people, but to lie down in front of the Islamic extremist enemy.

The UK government has even - disgracefully - stopped selling some arms to Israel just when the country needs such weapons most. But in expecting Israel to behave differently from the rest of us our societies and governments reveal far more about our own state than the State of Israel.

Because the truth is that behind the demands for Israel to lie down in front of its enemies is a fatal unwillingness of our own to face the problem which is in our midst.

There are those who think that Israel is somehow the cause of the world’s problems, or that in defending themselves from Islamic extremists Israel is somehow causing Islamic extremism. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The extremists of Hamas are the ideological bedfellows of the extremists of ISIS who are rampaging through Syria and Iraq, crucifying and beheading as they go.

The video of the apparent beheading of American journalist James Foley by an ISIS murderer with a British accent has shocked the world. ISIS or IS are the soul-mates of Boko Haram who kidnap and kill Christian villagers in the North of Nigeria and stole 300 schoolgirls earlier this year.

They also share the exact same ideology – if not yet the same means – as those people who were found in Birmingham earlier this year teaching British pupils to hate wider British society and cut themselves off from non-Muslims.

But it is this last part of the equation which many people seem so incapable of dealing with. They see the millions of Muslims who have come to our continent and see how many of them are radical. But it is a problem they fear they cannot deal with.

They believe that if Israel just gave up fighting and disappeared that the rest of us would be able to live in peace. They see the young Muslims who stormed into a supermarket in Birmingham last weekend, trashing the products and assaulting a British policeman and they think “this is caused by Israel.”

They see young Parisian Muslims throw slabs of concrete at police and set fire to cars and they think “If only Israel weren’t responding to Hamas rocket-fire.” And they see Imams in Germany and Italy preach that all Jewish people must be killed and they pretend that it is not a problem for all of us.

How wrong they are. The problem of anti-Semitism, and Islamic anti-Semitism in particular today, is undoubtedly a problem for Jewish people. But it is only a problem for them first. It is a problem for all of us next.

What is it that lies behind this terrible Hamas-driven rage against Israel? What lies behind the desire for Israel to disappear? Today the world is finding out.

Because behind the flags of Hamas and Hezbollah which have flown at anti-Israel demonstrations in recent weeks is another flag. The black flag of jihad – the black flag most recently being waved in Iraq and Syria by ISIS.

Last month the black flag was flown from a car in London’s Blackwall tunnel as East End Muslims blocked the traffic. At the entrance to a council estate in East London earlier this month there were anti-Israel banners and Palestinian flags. And then, on top of the lot, the black flag of jihad was flown. In Oxford Street last week Islamic extremists set up stall to try to recruit people to rally around the black flag of ISIS.

The black flag is not about Jewish people. Today in Iraq and Syria it is about Christians who ISIS is forcing to convert to Islam at gunpoint or face beheading. Many Christians are being killed by ISIS for refusing to renounce their faith. On some occasions Christians have tried to save their lives by “converting” at gunpoint and ISIS have killed them anyway.

And this is not only about Christians. It is also about other minority faiths in Islamist dominated countries. In Iraq it is also about the Yazidis, the Mandeans and other ancient beliefs which predate Islam.

The ambition of the jihadists – from al-Qaeda to Hamas, Hezbollah, Boko Haram and more – is to subjugate the entire world.

It is now the duty of all decent people – including decent Muslims – to turn on these barbarians and make it clear they will not win.

Rather than offer up beleaguered Israel we should send another message. That the extremists will not win in their desire to take over Israel anymore than they will win in their stated desire to raise the black flag of jihad over Rome, Washington, Downing Street and Buckingham Palace.

Israel is not the cause of the world’s problems. It is simply on the front line of them.

But increasingly so are we all. And if we abandon Israel today then one day – too late – we will realise that in fact what we abandoned was ourselves.

Friday, August 22, 2014

CNN delved into a shocking interview about what is really happening to Christians in the Middle East.

Mark Arabo, a California businessman and Chaldean-American leader, revealed gruesome details about the atrocities Muslims are committing in Iraq.

“Christianity in Mosul is dead, and a Christian holocaust is in our midst.” Arabo said that a “Christian genocide” is occurring and “children are being beheaded, mothers are being raped and killed, and fathers are being hung.”

Right now, three thousand Christians are in Iraq fleeing to neighboring cities,” he said, calling the world to follow France’s example and open their borders to the hundreds of thousands of Christian refugees.

CNN’s Jonathan Mann interrupted in disbelief, “You’re startling me with the severity of what you’re describing. You said they are — beheading children?”

“They are systematically beheading children,” Arabo confirmed, “and mothers and fathers. The world hasn’t seen an evil like this for generations.”

Muslims beheading children is not unheard of. When photos surfaced of a small Syrian girl’s headless body, Muslim sympathizers screamed “photoshop.” However, they were silenced when the source released graphic video footage proving the unspeakable atrocities were reality.

“There’s actually a park in Mosul where they actually beheaded children and put their heads on a stick… this is crimes against humanity. They are doing the most horrendous, the most heart-breaking crimes that you can think of.”

The park Arabo is describing was reported by Catholic Online, which has posted graphic photos of the slaughter ISIS is exacting.

The Islamists in Mosul and other communities in Syria and Iraq have created music videos of their militants murdering these civilians. The sheer glee the terrorists display while killing is utterly disturbing, and not for weak constitutions.

Mann also asked Arabo if ISIS’s warning to Christians in Mosul to pay the jizyah, convert, leave or die is true, and “are Christians managing to escape by paying a fine?”

Arabo explained that after Christians would pay the fine, the insurgents would take the “wives and daughters and make them their wives. So, it’s really convert or die.”

Still, the reports of those who’ve been captured and forced to convert are subsequently killed after converting.

“They are absolutely killing every Christian they see,” Arabo said. “This is absolutely a genocide in every sense of the word. They want everyone to convert, and they want sharia law to be the law of the land.”

The videotaped beheading of American journalist James Foley on Tuesday August 19th has shocked the American public even though there has been thousands of beheadings by Islamist jihadists around the world. Last week at the Annual International Association for Identification (Crime Scene) Conference I presented a three hour lecture titled Beheading Epidemic and it was not nearly enough time to cover the forensic and investigation aspects of this widespread global phenomenon.

The videotaped murder of James Foley demonstrates the evolution of beheading as a jihadist tactic made popular by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, the predecessor group of the Islamic State Army. The similarities and differences are significant. James Foley’s execution involved the classic Al Qaeda forensic signature. Similar to the dozens of Iraqi and foreign hostages that were beheaded by Al Qaeda in Iraq, James Foley had his hands cuffed behind his back, was kneeling in front of his captor and was dressed in the orange clothing symbolic of the type worn by detainees in U.S. prisons and Guantanamo Bay.

Al-Zarqawi’s videotaped ritual beheadings typically included a reading of offenses, confession, judgment, last words, execution, and a verbal statement of demands. The executioner was dressed in military type uniform consisting of black clothing, including ski mask covering his face and prominently displaying the murder weapon, his knife. The ritual pattern typically began with a statement from the executioner reciting the reason for the death sentence, which alluded to current political events, usually teeming with religious language justifying the violence, praise for Allah and often containing future threats. The victim then had the opportunity for last words; sometimes he confessed to being a spy or whatever the group had coerced him into confessing, or pleaded with the audience to acquiesce to the kidnappers’ demands and secure his release. At that point the head was cut off with a small knife by the leader, held in the air and then placed on the victim’s back.

Differences in the ISIS beheading video of James Foley include the high production value, outdoor scenic space and slick editing. Instead of an interior space decorated with terrorist group banners, it is a stark outdoor scene with just blue sky and desert as background placing all focus on the two men and the message to America. Instead of a flag hanging on the wall behind several terrorists, the ISIS black flag emblem is flying in the top left corner occasionally displaying the al-furqan media emblem underneath. Instead of nasheeds playing in the background, the quiet emphasizes both Foley’s scripted speech and the Jihadists threat to kill more Americans. Significantly the sound of screaming, the image of blood gushing out of the wound and the praising of Allah has been edited out. The only bloody graphic is a quick screen shot of the head placed on the center of the back of Foley’s body, proof of death and the classic Islamist Jihadist forensic signature. The impact of the film immediately cutting to and ending with the image of Steven Sotloff, another American journalist dressed in the same orange jumpsuit, the obvious next victim if President Obama does not meet their demands, is exceedingly powerful.

The most significant difference in the James Foley beheading video is the absence of religious language, particularly praising Allah during the execution. There should be no doubt that Allah was praised while cutting Foleys throat and that detail of the murder was deliberately edited out. Praising Allah ritualizes the murder and justifies the violence in the name of Islam. It is extremely atypical that the executioner and other participants during beheadings would not shout the phrase Allahu Akbar. The editing demonstrates that the focus of this propaganda video was political. The message to the American public was that Foleys death was not the result of Islamist ideology but that his death was the consequence of America getting involved in the war against ISIS. This message will most likely resonate with many Americans and illustrates the media savvy of ISIS.

Other than the ritual execution the most disturbing aspect of the murder is that the terrorist is speaking with a British accent. This high production beheading video served several purposes. One was to pressure the American public to stay out of Iraq and Syria and it also functions as a recruitment video for more Westerners to join ISIS. The British jihadist earned his stripes by murdering Foley and he will become a rock star among other radicalized Westerners.

Although beheading is an ancient method of warfare, the use of cell phones and video cameras to film and document ritual executions is a contemporary phenomenon that has evolved into a new tactic of war. Beheading videos are inherently symbolic, in fact they are the personification of symbolic warfare, they function as both strategic and psychological operations and have been extremely successful in radicalizing Western Muslims into fighting in the global jihad. They have particular appeal to young Muslim men who view the violence as vengeance against perceived oppression and offenses of Islam and to young Muslim men living in Western countries who feel marginalized. The warrior ethos appeals to vulnerable men who find a sense of purpose by identifying themselves as Mujahideen soldiers fighting for a heroic cause. Many of these young men have become desensitized to violence through videogames which often involve graphic decapitation of enemies.

Beheading videos have taken on a life of their own significantly contributing to the recruitment of young American and European Muslims into violent jihadists. This was evident in the case of Mohammed Merah, the 23-year-old French citizen who killed seven people in a series of three gun attacks targeting French soldiers and Jewish civilians in the cities of Montauban and Toulouse, France in March 2012. Two years prior to the shootings, Merah attempted to recruit other Muslim boys for jihad by showing them beheading videos. Merah was so impressed with jihadist beheading videos that he filmed all of his killings with a camera strapped to his body, edited the film of his murders into a video and sent the video to al Jazeera to ensure that he would receive proper recognition. Beheading videos played a significant role in inspiring him to commit the killings, he not only starred in but directed his own propaganda film so he could achieve notoriety and live in infamy as a heroic jihadist warrior in Islamist cyberspace.

The influence of beheading videos as a propaganda tool is also apparent in the arrests of failed terrorists in Europe and the United States. Beheading videos were discovered in the homes of six men who attempted to bomb the London Underground and a bus on July 21, 2005 and in the home of two of the men who plotted a terrorist attack against Fort Dix, U.S. Army base in New Jersey. An alarming examples of the effect of beheading videos was made public on January 31, 2007, when nine British Pakistanis were arrested in Birmingham England for planning to kidnap and behead a British Muslim soldier. They planned to videotape the beheading of the soldier in the same manner as the beheading of hostages in Iraq. Several beheading videos were found in a raid on their house. This plot was a prelude to the actual murder of Lee Rigby, a British soldier who was beheaded in broad daylight on a London street on May 22, 2013 by a British jihadist who gave public interviews with the bloody knife in his hand.

In a July 2012 incident police found beheading videos and bomb-making materials in the home of a British Muslim couple who were convicted for plotting to bomb Jewish targets in Manchester. In 2008 there was a disturbing report of a 12 year old non-Muslim British boy who had a collection of beheading videos on his mobile phone. The videos were found by teachers who reported the child to police after he sent clips to his classmates. To a twelve year old beheading videos are the perfect combination of horror films and videogames both of which desensitize them to the reality of violence. Al Qaeda and ISIS exploit those addicted to video violence by supplying them with an ideology, weapons, training and real life targets so they can fulfill their heroic violent fantasies. James Foley’s executioner was one of their successful recruits. A trail of beheading videos may lead to his identity.James Foley Went Looking to Support Terrorists in Syria, Instead They Cut Off His Head

James Foley was one of a new breed of activists calling themselves journalists. He didn’t travel to report on a story, but to promote an agenda. And the agenda was obvious from his Twitter feed.

Any human life lost is tragic, but a moral individual would have much more empathy for the Syrian Christians who suffered at the hands of Foley’s favorite Jihadists than one of their pet propagandists. For the most Foley only mentioned Syrian Christians when he was promoting the myth that the Sunni Jihadists were actually a secular democracy-loving force that incorporated Christians and Kurds on equal terms.

Foley came to Syria to support the Sunni Islamist rebels against the Syrian government. He was a vehement advocate and while he didn’t necessarily side with any single group, he echoed the one sided narrative rather than telling the truth about the Islamists. His Twitter feed was full of urgings to arm the Jihadists.

Meanwhile he sneered at America’s War on Terror.

He cheered on the Sunni Muslim terrorists fighting to ethnically cleanse the Christians of Aleppo. In the conflict between Israel and Hamas, his tweets and retweets were chock full of pro-Sunni Syrian terrorist propaganda.

When Newsweek’s Muslim Rage cover story came out, Foley mocked it too. Raging Muslims. How silly and Islamophobic.Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary: London Rapper Identified As ISIS Militant Who Beheaded James Foley

Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary has reportedly been identified the ISIS militant who beheaded American journalist James Foley in a video released this week.

Reports over the last several days had indicated that British intelligence forces were focusing in on the 23-year-old former London resident, who had achieved some fame in the UK for his rap career. Sources say that Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary left his family’s upscale home in London last year to join ISIS.

Bary is believed to have traveled to Syria, and recently tweeted a picture of himself holding a severed head.

Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary had a somewhat successful rap career, with some of his songs earning play on BBC radio. In early songs he made references to drug use and violence, as well as the threat of his family being deported to Egypt. His father, Adel Abdul Bary, was extradited from Britain to the United States on charges of terrorism in 2012 and was believed to be a close lieutenant of Osama bin Laden.

“It’s hard to progress in the future with a damaged past but still I try to count my blessings and I thank Allah,” he rapped in 2012.

“I’m trying to change my ways but there’s blood on my hands and I can’t change my ways until there’s funds in the bank.

In the James Foley beheading video, a masked executioner with a British accent read a statement warning the United States not to enter the conflict. The man later severed Foley’s neck with a knife and cut off is head.

Experts believe that British forces had likely identified Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary not long after the video was released.

Professor Peter Neumann, director of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King’s College London, said authorities were likely quite familiar with the British suspect.

He said: “I’d be very surprised if they haven’t already narrowed it down to a small group of people.

“The video provides enough clues to show who is responsible. MI6 probably do have a rough idea already of where the hostages are. The intelligence agencies probably have it narrowed down to two or three people.”

British intelligence has not officially confirmed that Abdel-Majed Abdel Bary is the suspect in the James Foley beheading.

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Know your enemy. To know what ISIS is, we have to clear away the media myths about ISIS.

ISIS is not a new phenomenon.

Wahhabi armies have been attacking Iraq in order to wipe out Shiites for over two hundred years. One of the more notably brutal attacks took place during the administration of President Thomas Jefferson.

That same year the Marine Corps saw action against the Barbary Pirates and West Point opened, but even Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and Howard Zinn chiming via Ouija board would have trouble blaming the Wahhabi assault on the Iraqi city of Kerbala in 1802 on the United States or an oil pipeline.

Forget the media portrayals of ISIS as a new extreme group that even the newly moderate Al Qaeda thinks is over the top, its armies are doing the same things that Wahhabi armies have been doing for centuries. ISIS has Twitter accounts, pickup trucks and other borrowed Western technology, but otherwise it’s just a recurring phenomenon that has always been part of Islam. Sunnis and Shiites have been killing each other for over a thousand years. Declaring other Muslims to be infidels and killing them is also a lot older than the suicide bomb vest.

Al Qaeda and ISIS are at odds because its Iraqi namesake had a different agenda. Al Qaeda always had different factions with their own agendas. These factions were not more extreme or less extreme. They just had different nationalistic backgrounds and aims.

The Egyptian wing of Al Qaeda was obsessed with Egypt. Bin Laden was obsessed with Saudi Arabia. Some in Al Qaeda wanted a total world war. Others wanted to focus on taking over Muslim countries as bases. These differences sometimes led to threats and even violence among Al Qaeda members.

Bin Laden prioritized Saudi Arabia and America. That made it possible for Al Qaeda to pick up training from Hezbollah which helped make 9/11 possible. This low level cooperation with Iran was endangered when Al Qaeda in Iraq made fighting a religious war with Shiites into its priority.

That did not mean that Bin Laden liked Shiites and thought that AQIQ was “extreme” for killing them. This was a tactical disagreement over means.

During the Iraq War, Bin Laden had endorsed Al Qaeda in Iraq’s goal of fighting the Shiite “Rejectionists” by framing it as an attack on America. AQIQ’s Zarqawi had privately made it clear that he would not pledge allegiance to Osama bin Laden unless the terrorist leader endorsed his campaign against Shiites.

Bin Laden and the Taliban had been equally comfortable with Sipahe Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi which provided manpower for the Taliban while massacring Shiites in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Last year LEJ had killed over a hundred Shiite Hazaras in one bombing.

The narrative that ISIS was more extreme than Al Qaeda because it killed Shiites and other Muslims doesn’t hold up in even recent history.

The media finds it convenient to depict the rise of newly extremist groups being radicalized by American foreign policy, Israeli blockades or Danish cartoons. A closer look however shows us that these groups did not become radicalized, rather they increased their capabilities.

ISIS understood from the very beginning that targeting Shiites and later Kurds would give it more appeal to Sunni Arabs inside Iraq and around the Persian Gulf. Bin Laden tried to rally Muslims by attacking America. ISIS has rallied Muslims by killing Shiites, Kurds, Christians and anyone else it can find.

Every news report insists that ISIS is an extreme outlier, but if that were really true then it would not have been able to conquer sizable chunks of Iraq and Syria. ISIS became huge and powerful because its ideology drew the most fighters and the most financial support. ISIS is powerful because it’s popular.

ISIS has become more popular and more powerful than Al Qaeda because Muslims hate other Muslims even more than they hate America. Media reports treat ISIS as an outside force that inexplicably rolls across Iraq and terrorizes everyone in its path. In reality, it’s the public face of a Sunni coalition. When ISIS massacres Yazidis, it’s not just following an ideology; it’s giving Sunni Arabs what they want.

Jamal Jamir, a surviving Yazidi, told CNN that his Arab neighbors had joined in the killing.

ISIS is dominating parts of Iraq and Syria because it draws on the support of a sizable part of the Sunni Arab population. It has their support because it is committed to killing or driving out Christians, Yazidis, Shiites and a long list of peoples in Iraq who either aren’t Muslims or aren’t Arabs and giving their land and possessions to the Sunni Arabs.

The media spent years denying that the Syrian Civil War was a sectarian conflict between Sunnis and Shiites. It’s unable to deny the obvious in Iraq, but it carefully avoids considering the implications.

Genocides are local. They are rarely carried out without the consent and participation of the locals. An army alone will have trouble committing genocide unless it has the cooperation of a local population that wants to see another group exterminated. When we talk about ISIS, we are really talking about Sunni Arabs in Iraq and Syria. Not all of them, but enough that ISIS and its associated groups have become the standard bearers of the Sunni civil wars in Syria and Iraq.

Hillary Clinton and John McCain can complain that we could have avoided the rise of ISIS if we had only armed the right sort of Jihadists in Syria. But if ISIS became dominant because its agenda had popular support, then it would not have mattered whom we armed or didn’t arm.

We armed the Iraqi military to the teeth, but it didn’t do any good because the military didn’t represent any larger consensus in an Iraq divided along religious and ethnic lines.

To understand ISIS, we have to unlearn many of the bad ideas we picked up since September 11. Terrorists, the media tell us, represent some extreme edge of the population. If they have popular support, it’s only because the civilian population has somehow become radicalized. (And usually it’s our fault.)

And yet that model doesn’t hold up. It never did.

The religious and ethnic strife in the Middle East out of which ISIS emerged and which has become its brand, goes back over a thousand years. If support for terrorism emerges from radicalization, then the armies of Islam were radicalized in the time of Mohammed and have never been de-radicalized.

Terrorism is not reactive. As ISIS has shown us, it has a vision for the future. The Caliphate, like the Reich, is a utopia which can only be created through the mass murder and repression of all those who do not belong. This isn’t a new vision. It’s the founding vision of Islam.

What is wrong with ISIS is what is wrong with Islam.

We can defeat ISIS, but we should remember that its roots are in the hearts of the Sunni Muslims who have supported it. ISIS and Al Qaeda are only symptoms of the larger problem.

We can see the larger problem flying Jihadist flags in London and New Jersey. We can see it trooping through Australian and Canadian airports to join ISIS. We can see it in the eyes of the Sunni Arabs murdering their Yazidi neighbors. ISIS is an expression of the murderous hate within Islam. We are not only at war with an acronym, but with the dark hatred in the hearts of men, some of whom are in Iraq and Pakistan. And some of whom live next door.

The Islamic State is turning into a huge public relations problem for groups like the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and its allies. For years they have insisted that Islam is a religion of peace that has nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorism committed with alarming regularity in its name, and that the people responsible for linking Islam with terrorism were not Islamic jihad terrorists, but “Islamophobic” opponents of jihad terror. But then comes along a group calling itself The Islamic State, committing unimaginable atrocities and presenting each one as an authentic embodiment of Islamic texts and teachings, and the deception campaign at which CAIR officials have labored so assiduously for so many years, and with such great success, is in danger of crashing around their uneasy necks.

Take, for example, the recent revelation that, according to the UN News Centre, “some 1,500 Yazidi and Christian persons may have been forced into sexual slavery.” A similar kidnapping by Islamic jihadists in Nigeria recently horrified the world, but much overlooked was the fact that such behavior is sanctioned by the Qur’an. According to Islamic law, Muslim men can take “captives of the right hand” (Qur’an 4:3, 4:24, 33:50). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war” (33:50). 4:3 and 4:24 extend this privilege to Muslim men in general, as does this passage. “Certainly will the believers have succeeded: They who are during their prayer humbly submissive, and they who turn away from ill speech, and they who are observant of zakah, and they who guard their private parts except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed” (Qur’an 23:1-6).

These passages have not gone unnoticed. The Egyptian Sheikh Abu-Ishaq al-Huwayni declared in May 2011 that “we are in the era of jihad,” and that meant Muslims would take slaves. In a subsequent interview he elaborated:

Jihad is only between Muslims and infidels. Spoils, slaves, and prisoners are only to be taken in war between Muslims and infidels. Muslims in the past conquered, invaded, and took over countries. This is agreed to by all scholars—there is no disagreement on this from any of them, from the smallest to the largest, on the issue of taking spoils and prisoners. The prisoners and spoils are distributed among the fighters, which includes men, women, children, wealth, and so on.

When a slave market is erected, which is a market in which are sold slaves and sex-slaves, which are called in the Qur’an by the name milk al-yamin, “that which your right hands possess” [Koran 4:24]. This is a verse from the Qur’an which is still in force, and has not been abrogated. The milk al-yamin are the sex-slaves. You go to the market, look at the sex-slave, and buy her. She becomes like your wife, (but) she doesn’t need a (marriage) contract or a divorce like a free woman, nor does she need a wali. All scholars agree on this point—there is no disagreement from any of them. [...] When I want a sex slave, I just go to the market and choose the woman I like and purchase her.

Around the same time, on May 25, 2011, a female Kuwaiti politician, Salwa al-Mutairi, also spoke out in favor of the Islamic practice of sexual slavery of non-Muslim women, emphasizing that the practice accorded with Islamic law and the parameters of Islamic morality.

A merchant told me that he would like to have a sex slave. He said he would not be negligent with her, and that Islam permitted this sort of thing. He was speaking the truth. I brought up [this man’s] situation to the muftis in Mecca. I told them that I had a question, since they were men who specialized in what was halal, and what was good, and who loved women. I said, “What is the law of sex slaves?”

The mufti said, “With the law of sex slaves, there must be a Muslim nation at war with a Christian nation, or a nation which is not of the religion, not of the religion of Islam. And there must be prisoners of war.”

“Is this forbidden by Islam?” I asked.

“Absolutely not. Sex slaves are not forbidden by Islam. On the contrary, sex slaves are under a different law than the free woman. The free woman must be completely covered except for her face and hands. But the sex slave can be naked from the waist up. She differs a lot from the free woman. While the free woman requires a marriage contract, the sex slave does not—she only needs to be purchased by her husband, and that’s it. Therefore the sex slave is different than the free woman.”

The Islamic State acts on these beliefs, which are Qur’an-based. The kidnappings, meanwhile, have taken place amid a backdrop of unimaginable slaughter. The victims were those who refused the Islamic State’s demand that they convert to Islam to save their lives: a Yazidi woman explained last week why thousands of Yazidis had fled the area of Iraq controlled by the Islamic State: “We came here because the terrorists said, ‘Either you convert to Islam or we slaughter you.’”

The Quran says “there is no compulsion in religion” (2:256) – a verse much beloved of Western non-Muslim multiculturalists, but it also says that Muslims must fight unbelievers until “religion is all for Allah” (8:39). And it insists that Muslims should “slay them” wherever they’re found (cf. 2:191; 4:89; 9:5).

It also says that Muslims must fight against the “People of the Book” – Jews, Christians, and others who are considered to have received previous revelations from Allah – until they “pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued” (9:29). That option of submission and subjugation, however, is not open to groups that have no written revelation that could qualify them for “People of the Book” status. Hence for the Yazidis, to convert or die are the only Qur’anic options open for them.

The Islamic State’s actions are an open book, and that book is the Qur’an. American Muslim spokesmen would do well to explain how they are misinterpreting the Islamic holy books, but claims to that effect have been vague and short of references to problematic passages. As long as that refusal to confront the problem continues, so will the killing.

Sunday, August 17, 2014

Islamic State militants have killed at least 500 members of Iraq's Yazidi minority, burying some alive and taking hundreds of women as slaves, an Iraqi government minister told Reuters on Sunday.

Human rights minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani accused the Sunni Muslim insurgents - who have ordered the community they regard as "devil worshippers" to convert to Islam or die - of celebrating a "a vicious atrocity" with cheers and weapons waved in the air. No independent confirmation was available.

Islamic State's advance through northern Iraq has forced tens of thousands to flee, threatened the capital of the Kurdish autonomous region and provoked the first U.S. air strikes in the area since Washington withdrew troops from Iraq in late 2011.

Sudani said in a telephone interview that news of the killings had come from people who had escaped town of Sinjar, an ancient home of the Yazidis, a Kurdish-speaking community whose religion has set them apart from Muslims and other faiths.

"We have striking evidence obtained from Yazidis fleeing Sinjar and some who escaped death, and also crime scene images that show indisputably that the gangs of the Islamic State have executed at least 500 Yazidis after seizing Sinjar," he said.

"Some of the victims, including women and children were buried alive in scattered mass graves in and around Sinjar."

President Barack Obama said on Saturday that U.S. air strikes had destroyed arms that the Islamic State, which has captured swathes of northern Iraq since June, could have used against the Iraqi Kurds. However, he warned that there was no quick fix for the crisis that threatens to tear Iraq apart.

Kurdish regional president Masoud Barzani urged his allies to send arms to help his forces hold off the militants, who have bases across the Syrian border. During a visit by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Barzani said: "We are not fighting a terrorist organization, we are fighting a terrorist state."

In comments likely to put pressure on Washington to step up its response to Islamic State, Iraqi rights minister Sudani said: "The terrorist Islamic State has also taken at least 300 Yazidi women as slaves and locked some of them inside a police station in Sinjar and transferred others to the town of Tal Afar. We are afraid they will take them outside the country.

"In some of the images we have obtained there are lines of dead Yazidis who have been shot in the head while the Islamic State fighters cheer and wave their weapons over the corpses," he added. "This is a vicious atrocity."

A deadline passed at midday on Sunday for 300 families from the Yazidi community - followers of a religion influenced by the Zoroastrianism of ancient Persia - to convert to Islam or die. It was not immediately clear if the victims to whom the minister referred were from that group of families.

U.S. military aircraft have dropped relief supplies to tens of thousands of Yazidis who have collected on the desert top of nearby Mount Sinjar, seeking shelter from the insurgents.

At the Vatican, Pope Francis held a silent prayer for victims of the Iraqi conflict, who include members of the Christian minority, during his weekly address on Sunday.

"Thousands of people, among them many Christians, banished brutally from their houses, children dying of hunger and thirst as they flee, women kidnapped, people massacred, violence of all kinds," he said.

"All of this deeply offends God and deeply offends humanity."

Maliki Criticism

Speaking before U.S. warplanes struck militant targets for a second day on Saturday, Obama said it would take more than bombs to restore stability, and criticized Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's Shi'ite-led government for failing to share power with Iraq's Sunni minority, which dominated before the U.S. invasion.

France joined the calls for Iraq's feuding leaders to form an inclusive government capable of countering the militants. "Iraq is in need of a broad unity government, and all Iraqis should feel that they are represented in this government," Foreign Minister Fabius said.

"All Iraqis should feel they are represented to take part in this battle against terrorism," he told a news conference with his Iraqi counterpart in Baghdad.

Maliki's critics say his sectarian agenda has prompted heavily armed Sunni tribes to join the insurgency. But Maliki, serving in a caretaker capacity since an inconclusive election in April, has defied calls by Sunnis, Kurds, fellow Shi'ites, regional power broker Iran and Iraq's top cleric to step aside for a less divisive leader.

The pressure from France came a day after Obama described the upheaval in the north as a "wake-up call" to Iraqis who have slipped back into sectarian bloodshed not seen since a civil war peaked in 2006-2007.

Nearly every day police report kidnappings, bombings and execution-style killings in many cities, towns and villages.

The Islamic State, which sees Shi'ites as infidels who deserve to be killed, has met little resistance. Thousands of U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers fled when its Arab and foreign fighters swept through northern Iraq from eastern Syria in June.

The collapse of the Iraqi army prompted Kurds and Shi'ite militias to step in, with limited success.

The Sunni militants routed Kurds in their latest advance with tanks, artillery, mortars and vehicles seized from fleeing Iraqi troops, calling into question the Kurds' reputation as fearsome warriors.

A former head of German intelligence echoed the Kurdish plea for arms: "The Kurds are hopelessly outgunned," August Hanning told the Bild am Sonntag newspaper.

Iranian-trained Shi'ite militias may stand a better chance than the Kurds but they are accused of kidnapping and killing Sunnis, playing into the hands of the Islamic State, which also controls a large chunk of western Iraq.

After hammering Kurdish forces last week, the militants are just 30 minutes' drive from Arbil, the Iraqi Kurdish capital, which until now has been spared the sectarian bloodshed that has scarred other parts of Iraq for a decade.

The possibility of an attack on Arbil has prompted foreigners working for oil companies to leave the city and Kurds to stock up on AK-47 assault rifles at the arms bazaar.

In their latest sweep through the north, the Sunni insurgents routed Kurdish forces and seized a fifth oil field, several more villages and the biggest dam in Iraq - which could give them the ability to flood cities or cut off water and power supplies - hoisting their black flags up along the way.

After spending more than $2 trillion on its war in Iraq and losing thousands of soldiers, the United States must now find ways to tackle a group that is even more hardline than al-Qaeda and has threatened to march on Baghdad.

The most barbaric bunch of blood-thirsty misogynists this side of Genghis Khan are yearning for western “brides”—and the “brides,” who will be no more than sex and reproductive slaves, are coming, via an internet campaign, to service ISIS’s male Jihadis in the Caliphate in formation in Syria and Iraq. There is a “marriage bureau” in the northern Syrian town of Al Bab for Western women in a marrying state of mind.

Britain’s interior minister Theresa May warned that “we think around 400 UK-linked individuals have gone out to fight in Syria, mainly young men but also some women.” Officials worry that these numbers will rise “with the increased online activity luring vulnerable women to Syria.” The would-be “brides” are given point-by-point guidance on what to expect.”

What is coming their way is far darker than Fifty Shades of Grey.

While a desire to romanticize and tame the savage beast may be at work, I think that other motives are involved in the matter of the brides for Jihad.

Thus far, it is estimated that only hundreds, not more, of such Western girls and women have actually gone to join ISIS/ISIL in Syria and Iraq. But police and other experts fear that the number may grow.

Some Jihad Janes may have been sexually and physically traumatized by their Western families and seek to escape the country or the culture that allowed this to happen. They may not know that they are jumping from the proverbial fire pan into the fire itself.

Young, impressionable, naïve, and dreamy girls and women may yearn for a Grand “Arabian Nights” kind of Adventure. I doubt they have ever read the Arabian Nights, which is filled with the most bestial acts imaginable, including that of be-heading virgin brides at dawn, after the marriage has been consummated.

I understand this all too well since I, too, once yearned for a grand adventure—and I had one. I write about it in An American Bride in Kabul. What began as a fairy tale soon became a nightmare in which I found myself fighting for my life. I barely got out alive—but that I did. I know what it is like to live in purdah and in a polygamous family—one in which I was pressured to convert to Islam every day. And this was before the Taliban, before Al-Qaeda and the rise of the Caliphate maniacs. Even then, Afghanistan was a place in which-- in addition to great natural beauty, elegant hospitality, humor, and warmth-- could be described as rampant with indigenous misogyny, cruelty, poverty, illiteracy, paranoia, political prisons, routine torture, and the most profound ignorance. The kind of Islamic gender and religious apartheid that I lived was not caused by Western capitalism, colonialism, or imperialism. This was one of the most important lessons that I learned.

Today, young Western girls and women are being lured by internet ads posted by ISIS/ISIL pimps, both male and female, which appeal to their desire to be part of something larger than themselves; something important and possibly dangerous. However, what may be attracting them at a deeper level is, paradoxically, the promise of non-freedom. For many Westerners, too many choices function as a burden and accepting a role in which one’s duties are fixed may seem preferable. Also, just as young men in search of attentive father-figures may be easily indoctrinated by Jihad handlers whom I describe as serial-killers-by-proxy—young women, in search of apparently benevolent and “caring” mother-figures may be similarly lured by women into this particular misadventure.

A woman who becomes a Muslim wife believes, however incorrectly, that she will be rewarded and loved for following the rules and that she will have female company at all times, that she will never be lonely, isolated, or unhappy again.

Here’s what this dreamer does not know. War zones are exceedingly dangerous—and her marriage will be the most intense war-zone of all. If she is lucky, she will (only) be forcibly face- and body-veiled and she will never again breathe easily in a stifling, hot climate. Her fate may include polygamy which, contrary to myth, does not necessarily mean “female solidarity” and supportive female company. Co-wives do not always get along and, frustrated, angry, and competitive, they often routinely mistreat and make life miserable for each other.

Then there is the normalized wife-beating for any Muslim wife who is viewed as having committed even a small infraction. If she or her daughters are viewed as “shameful” in any way, they will be honor killed, stoned to death, be-headed in the public square.

She may be expected to undergo female genital mutilation so that she will never be able to experience sexual pleasure; every sexual interaction will be agonizing as will each and every experience of giving birth (Or of urinating, etc.).

Being pregnant all the time and having to give birth under primitive conditions is also a high risk proposition. Jihad Jane may not fully understand that she can easily be divorced and will have no recourse. Her children will never “belong” to her. They are the custodial property of their fathers and of their father’s family and clan. If a Bride for Jihad ever changes her mind and wants to flee, she will have to do so with no help, with the hounds of hell hard at her heels—and without her children; without even pocket change.

She might also find herself jailed or whipped for some minor infraction, or stoned or be-headed for a more allegedly serious infraction.

That’s if she is lucky and she enters into a “proper” Islamic marriage.

What may be going on here is something else, namely temporary marriages or Sexual Jihad. She may find herself passed from one Holy Warrior to the other with absolutely no say in the matter. Her “marriage” may last an hour or a day. It is well known that there are legal Islamic religious laws which enshrine just such practices. One source has found and posted just such a brothel-like schedule in Arabic—and translated it into English.

Another source has described what is going on as sex trafficking—but for Jihad. “Sex traffickers—whoever they are—prey on the young, the vulnerable, the weak. Why would we expect anything different from terrorists?” They are also known as “holy war brides” and one sex schedule shows these girls how to take turns with the Iraqi holy warriors (in terms of) sexual relations.

If she is young, exceptionally white, has blonde or red hair, has large breasts, and a “pretty” face, she may find herself sold into the harems of Saudi Arabia, Brunei, or the Gulf States.

We live in dangerously unsettling times and, at such times, women especially seek out those men who may appear the strongest in terms of their ability to protect their women. If so, what might this tell us about the relationship between certain Western men and such women? And what might this tell us about the cultural literacy, self-worth, and rationality of such Western women?

They have this dumb rule about women having to remain completely covered.

You can see it practically everywhere you go – even here in New England. I was witness to the practice just recently. It's summer – it's hot – 90 degrees plus with 80% humidity. A Muslim man is taking a walk with his son. They are dressed in shorts, tank tops and flip-flops. Beside them is who I assume to be the man's wife, covered from head to toe in black. Her headscarf was a niqab. The only things visible were her eyes.

How completely absurd! The practice of women covering up is supposed to be rooted in some sort of religious "modesty" code or something – that women should only be seen by their husbands. Bullcrap, I say. It's just another way for Muslim men to manifest power over women, who have virtually no rights.

And don't tell me the women don't mind dressing that way, as the males dress down to practically nothing in the hot summer sun.

The Clarion Project reported on July 29th that the Deputy PM of Turkey Bülent Arinç said that women should refrain from laughing in public, because it's immodest. Arinç, who spoke at an Eid el-Fitr gathering said, "[The woman] will know what is [forbidden] and not haram. She will not laugh in public. She will not be inviting in her attitudes and will protect her chasteness."

"Not be inviting in her attitudes"? In other words, women should not be seen or heard. You have nothing at all to contribute.

And are you kidding me? Protect her chasteness? How are they supposed to do that when Muslim fathers are marrying off their pre-teen daughters?

Who could do that to his child? I'll tell you who. Someone who sees no value in their female offspring.

Meanwhile the "Islamic State," busily expanding its empire, has captured a Syrian Army base near Raqqa. And what did they do with the captured soldiers? Did they treat them humanely as one would expect Americans or Israelis to do? That would be a big no! They beheaded them and stuck the severed heads on fence posts around the city. A truly gruesome sight. A picture is worth a thousand words. You may witness the barbarism for yourself.

And who does what Israel is forced to do? Who warns the enemy of an impending attack? Answer: nobody! But the Israelis are the bad guys.

Yet, all we ever see are dead innocents – women – children. Wonder why? Here's why. This from a journalist who just beat a hasty retreat from Gaza: "It's very simple, we did see Hamas people there launching rockets, they were close to our hotel, but if ever we dared point our camera on them they would simply shoot at us and kill us."

I'm simply tired of these Islamists getting a pass, or the press they really deserve. Yes, only a small minority of Muslims are the jihadists. I know that, but we don't see the outrage from the Muslim community or any of the religion hating lefty groups.

Where's the outrage – like that of the Catholic Priest molestation incidents from years ago. All Catholics were called upon by every member of the press, every leftist group and every politician to condemn what occurred – and rightly so.

So again – where's the outrage? Where are these people demanding the same from all Muslims?

They're hiding under their desks, not wanting to upset CAIR, or ISNA, or maybe they just like their heads firmly attached.